Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="MediaBLITZ, post: 1952427, member: 77190"] Rudy, Rudy, Rudy (and I mean that in the Notre Dame chant vein - lol) - You hit the nail in the ass here. You just cannot over rate math in poker UNLESS you make it the only tool you use. Even though you can get pretty far (profit wise) by always making the mathematically correct play, you are missing out on other opportunities to profit by honing other tools at your disposal. Now concerning Sklansky and others. No where does Sklansky advocate a purely mathematical approach to the game. His background as an actuary in business and experience with risk assessment is certainly takes up a huge section of his toolbox. His background is primarily business (attending the prestigious Wharton Business School before going to poker). He has THREE WSOP bracelets in 23 ITM finishes and a WPT Invitational Championship - that is not too shabby. Author of over a dozen books. So is he a poker player or an author? Which does he enjoy more? Sure spends an awful lot of time writing, it seems. To question his "record" is a bit ludicrous He is the epitome of a guy whose life is poker - without the stress of having to grind or win tournaments. I think that is by choice if not just how it worked out for him. He doesn't have to win to insure his place. He really doesn't have to work on his game. Esfandiari, Hellmuth and Negreanu all have worked extra on their game the last couple of years - trying to learn new tricks. At least two of them incorporated outside coaching. Now let's look at another guy - Mike Caro (who is not shy about considering himself the best poker player on the planet). He also has a few books out there and is revered by the poker community as an "expert". Why don't we see Caro crushing the competition in these televised tourneys (which face it, is 95% of the poker TV we see)? Because Caro HATES tournaments. He thinks they are a suckers bet - a lottery (especially Main Event). Oh yeah he'll show up for Main Event, but like Doyle, is only there for camera time, goodwill and PR. Both of them would just as soon be doing something else with that time (and have said so). So before you call someone out you better understand their place in life and whether or not the things you think should be important to them are even in their top ten. I don't really think Sklansky gives a rats ass about dominating the game, though the benefit of winning a tournament next week sure would not hurt his book sales. But he's pretty well set. Here's another - I got to have lunch with Greg Raymer. He talked about how winning another main event would go way beyond the prize money in payoff because of how he could capitalize on it business wise. It was not about winning the prize money (though he's not going to hand it back) but how he could pretty much put it on cruise control from there on out (my words, not his). So a players paradigm and the way he thinks is the key - just like the NFL, NBA, etc. Most guys are happy to have just made it in the money - very few attain to the height's of Jerry Rice, Calvin Johnson, Joe Montana, Aaron Rodgers, Emmit Smith, LaDainian Tomlinson, Michael Jordan, or LeBron James. I personally know a guy who won over $100,000 winning a small tourney. Also has a few WSOP cashes. He is a poker pro, but he continues to focus on online cash and coaching cash for his income. Myself, I would be like, "Hey, I can do this - I'm going to go after more tournament gold." But he doesn't think like me - he has his life where he wants it and is going from there. Esfandiari - great example. Won a WPT years ago and went into "I'm a professional poker player - time to party!" mode. He woke up a couple years ago and was, "WTF? Have I peaked already?". The answer was no way, so he put aside the partying and started working on his game. I'd say it paid off. A few more years of this and people will start giving him credibility. [B] [/B] [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us